PDA

View Full Version : 2008 Qld Australia Day Weekender, 2008 Myer Tan Class 1 tournament



Garvinator
16-12-2007, 10:14 PM
2008 AUSTRALIA DAY WEEKENDER

A Myer Tan Australian Grand Prix Class 1 tournament.

26th-28th January

A CAQ approved event

Entry Fee: $40 (See Conditions)

Conditions of Entry

All entrants must be members of their State Chess Association.

Entries Close: 8pm 25-01-08
After that a $10 late fee applies

ACF Dec 07 Ratings Used

ROUND TIMES

Each Day: 10am, 12.30pm, 3pm

NO BYE AVAILABLE

Rate of Play

60 mins plus 10 sec per move (Bronstein / Time Delay)

Organised by Queensland Women’s Chess League

ABN: 82 778 940 323

Contact:

Gail Young
0411 704 815
email: qwcl@hotmail.com

PRIZES FOR EACH GROUP

1st $100
2nd $50
3rd $30

First Group (Round Robin)

10 highest rated

Second Group (Round Robin)
Next 10 highest rated
And so on

Last Group

Round Robin or Swiss Draw
dependant on number in this group

VENUE

Zillmere & Districts Community Sports Club
O’Callaghan Park
360 Zillmere Rd
Zillmere, Qld, 4034

ARBITER

Garvin Gray Mobile 0422 993 062

This tournament is ACF and Qld Junior rated

Make your cheque out to QWCL and post to:

Gail Young
PO Box 9
Inala, Qld, 4077

Phone or e-mail entries to:

Gail Young
0411 704 815
qwcl@hotmail.com

Pay on the day OR Direct deposit to QWCL
BSB: 804050
Account nr: 30406838
Bank: CUA
Use name as reference.

Garrett
17-12-2007, 08:12 AM
Interesting format.

I hope it goes well.

Cheers
George.

Garvinator
17-12-2007, 01:35 PM
Interesting format.

I hope it goes well.

Cheers
George.
Yes, something a little bit different. Will Garrett be playing, hope so :)

Garrett
17-12-2007, 01:48 PM
In all probability I will be playing a lot of chess next year Garvo.

Garvinator
17-12-2007, 02:33 PM
In all probability I will be playing a lot of chess next year Garvo.
:clap: :clap:

Ian Rout
18-12-2007, 02:33 PM
Does the tournament notice really mean to say "Bronstein" mode as opposed to "Fischer" mode?

Garvinator
18-12-2007, 03:57 PM
Does the tournament notice really mean to say "Bronstein" mode as opposed to "Fischer" mode?
Yes

CameronD
18-12-2007, 04:19 PM
Does the tournament notice really mean to say "Bronstein" mode as opposed to "Fischer" mode?

Will be interseted to see if this has an affect on entries??

I'm working, but it woould make me think twice about entering

Garvinator
18-12-2007, 04:35 PM
Will be interseted to see if this has an affect on entries??

I'm working, but it woould make me think twice about entering
Trialling something different in both format and time control. Also looking for a way around the real long 4 round a day weekenders, which start at 9:30am and don't finish till 7:30pm.

CameronD
18-12-2007, 05:01 PM
What will you do with unrated entries, at the bottom or approximate their rating. Also, what would happen if the [Alex] situation occurs again (Qld reserves)

I really hope you get a big turnup as the structure has some pluses.

Good points

- No huge mismatches that occur in swiss
- even distribution in prizemoney
- small entry fee for 9 games

?????

- sickness/withdrawals
- no byes
- top end may not be motivated to play

Bill Gletsos
18-12-2007, 05:11 PM
How can this possibly be a GP event if the field is broken up into groups of 10 player round robins.

CameronD
18-12-2007, 05:27 PM
How can this possibly be a GP event if the field is broken up into groups of 10 player round robins.

This will be an interesting matter!!!!

Maybe each division will be considered a separate tournament (hope they paid (divisions x $100) gp fee.

Interesting what Brian does about this.

Bill Gletsos
18-12-2007, 05:28 PM
This will be an interesting matter!!!!

Maybe each division will be considered a separate tournament (hope they paid (divisions x $100) gp fee.That just isnt possible.

Interesting what Brian does about this.Or the ACF.

CameronD
18-12-2007, 05:31 PM
That just isnt possible.

In theory it is, but it makes the gp concept a joke

Bill Gletsos
18-12-2007, 05:33 PM
In theory it is, but it makes the gp concept a jokeIn theory it isnt because the ACF would not approve it.

Garvinator
18-12-2007, 06:01 PM
Have raised this matter with Brian Jones. Please no more discussion on this matter until there is an official decision.

Garvinator
18-12-2007, 06:05 PM
What will you do with unrated entries, at the bottom or approximate their rating. Well with three rating systems to use, almost all players will have a rating or we can work out what roughly a person's rating would be if they have one from speaking to known people.

Those that are still unrated are most likely going to be young children in their first event, so they would be in the bottom division.



Also, what would happen if the [Alex] situation occurs again (Qld reserves) Please describe clearly what you mean by the [Alex] situation?

Bill Gletsos
18-12-2007, 06:07 PM
Have raised this matter with Brian Jones. Please no more discussion on this matter until there is an official decision.There is no reason people cannot discuss here as much as they like.

Of course more importantly was the structure of the event discussed with Brian Jones prior to it being submitted for inclusion in the GP.
If not why not, as the structure clearly does not qualify for inclusion in the GP.

Desmond
18-12-2007, 07:42 PM
I might be going blind, but where on the entry form does it state it is a GP event? I thought it was not.

Basil
18-12-2007, 07:55 PM
Please no more discussion on this matter until there is an official decision.
Discuss, whisper, witter, prattle, hypothesise, mutter, muse, ponder, suggest ... and more discussion ;)

CameronD
18-12-2007, 11:24 PM
I might be going blind, but where on the entry form does it state it is a GP event? I thought it was not.

http://www.chessaustralia.com.au/grandprix/index.cfm?p=calendar&category=QLD&year=2008&latest=no

CameronD
18-12-2007, 11:29 PM
Please describe clearly what you mean by the [Alex] situation?[/QUOTE]

wheather people who have prepaid need to register before the start of play. With such a low entrence fee, I can see people deciding not to turn up or withdrawing after a bad day 1. In swiss this isn't as much a disaster compared to the effects for this tournament.

CameronD
18-12-2007, 11:30 PM
Discuss, whisper, witter, prattle, hypothesise, mutter, muse, ponder, suggest ... and more discussion ;)


Winge, complain, protest, garvin ^##*## etc. :D

Bill Gletsos
18-12-2007, 11:33 PM
http://www.chessaustralia.com.au/grandprix/index.cfm?p=calendar&category=QLD&year=2008&latest=no
Boris was referring to the entry form which is on the CAQ website at http://www.caq.org.au/htm/2008ADW.pdf and it makes no mention of it being a GP event.

Garrett
19-12-2007, 07:38 AM
Will be interseted to see if this has an affect on entries??

I'm working, but it woould make me think twice about entering

I don't have a problem with the time control and it won't affect whether I play or not.

The format looks interesting, should ensure a great deal of evenly contested games.

I would like it though (and I'm sure Gavin has already thought of this) if it is spelled out clearly before round one and a reminder before other rounds exactly what Bronstein time control means.

Ian Rout
19-12-2007, 08:33 AM
I would like it though (and I'm sure Gavin has already thought of this) if it is spelled out clearly before round one and a reminder before other rounds exactly what Bronstein time control means.
I used to think I knew but I've now seen two distinctly different definitions. Both seem to me to have obvious defects that make them clearly inferior to Fischer mode which is why I queried if it was right.

With reference to the above discussion, it might be interesting to have a thread elsewhere on whether the GP can accommodate formats other than the mass Swiss, bearing in mind that Garvin doesn't want to do it in the context of this particular event, and it's a broader issue.

Garvinator
19-12-2007, 02:29 PM
With reference to the above discussion, it might be interesting to have a thread elsewhere on whether the GP can accommodate formats other than the mass Swiss, bearing in mind that Garvin doesn't want to do it in the context of this particular event, and it's a broader issue.
I would like to see a thread like this.

Garvinator
19-12-2007, 02:32 PM
I used to think I knew but I've now seen two distinctly different definitions. Both seem to me to have obvious defects that make them clearly inferior to Fischer mode which is why I queried if it was right. The famous site of mis-information wiki has a definition:


When it becomes a player's turn to move, the clock waits for the delay period before starting to subtract from the player's remaining time. For example, if the delay is five seconds, the clock waits for five seconds before counting down. The time is not accumulated. If the player moves within the delay period, no time is subtracted from his remaining time.

Garrett
20-12-2007, 06:44 AM
okay - I now have no idea what 'Bronstein' means. Garvo, you allude that Wiki's interpretation is incorrect.

I thought it was where you didn't get any increment until you first run out of time.

I am sure you will spell it out repeatedly at the tourney.

Garvinator
20-12-2007, 08:36 AM
okay - I now have no idea what 'Bronstein' means. Garvo, you allude that Wiki's interpretation is incorrect. No, wiki's definition is good enough :). I was making a tongue in cheek comment that wiki is usually full of mis-information :P


I thought it was where you didn't get any increment until you first run out of time. Nope, that is a different time control again. The time control you refer to does cause mass confusion for two main reasons:

1) Dgt's show a flag after one person has used up their allotted first time period. This flag does not indicate loss on time. It just shows who was the first player to use up their first allotted period of time.

Players claim flagfall thinking the other person has lost of time. When the arbiter tells the person what has happened, they arent impressed and usually still dont understand and sometimes think they have been cheated out of their win.

2) As soon as one person has used up their first allotted time and starts to receive the increment, both players start receiving the increment.

There have been many instances where the second player believes that they can let their clock run down to zero and will start receiving the increment, not realising that they have been receiving the increment from the time the first player starting receiving their increment.

The end result, player two loses as they ran out of time. If you are confused by this explanation, then that is exactly the point and hence why that time control is not used in Australia.


I am sure you will spell it out repeatedly at the tourney.Me, repeat announcements over many rounds to make sure they are heard, I would never dream of doing such a thing :whistle:

As for a different definition:

I will give this a go ;) from the dgtprojects website:


The earliest proposal (1969) came from IGM David Bronstein.
His method applies from the first move. Principal thinking time is reduced by delay. Before the principal thinking time is reduced, the player has a fixed amount of time to complete a move. Unlike the FIDE and Fischer methods, it is not possible to increase the thinking time by playing more quickly.

Lets say you are playing in a 60 minutes per player plus 10 seconds per move (Bronstein/Time delay) game.

You have used up just over 55 minutes of your thinking time and have 4 minutes 50 seconds left.

Your opponent makes their move. Under the fischer time control, your clock would immediately starting counting down 4:49, 4:48 etc etc. and as soon as you made your move, the ten second increment is added to your clock.

Under the bronstein time control, the thinking time is arranged a little bit differently.

Lets say once again that you have used up just over 55 minutes of your thinking time and have 4 minutes 50 seconds left.

Your opponent makes their move. Under the bronstein time control, your clock will stay at 4:50 for ten seconds. Only after the 10 seconds has expired does your clock start counting down, 4:49, 4:48 etc etc. If you make your move in 5 seconds, your clock returns to 4:50. As said, it is a time delay time control.

If you used 20 seconds to make your move, you would receive the full ten second increment.

It is not possible to accumulate more time than what was originally on your clock.

If someone thinks they can give a clearer explanation than this, feel free to contribute.

I wouldn't mind having an easier explanation ready at the tournament.

Ian Rout
20-12-2007, 08:56 AM
The two Bronsteins described above are the two that I've heard. For many years I thought it meant the mode described by Garrett, namely that increments would cut in only when one player had used all of their initial allocation. For ease of reference let's call this Bronstein-1.

More recently I came across the description attributed to Wikipedia (though not at that site), Bronstein-2, that there is no increment but players have an amount of time each move and the clock only counts down when that expires. For instance if the time is ten seconds then using two seconds leaves the clock unchanged, using ten seconds the same, and for using fifteen seconds only the last five seconds counts down.

The only point to Bronstein-1 is that it's a pre-programmed mode on the maroon DGTs whereas Fischer isn't. The one benefit I have seen claimed for Bronstein-2 is that in Fischer mode players can gain time by making pointless but harmless moves, whereas in Bronstein-2 there is no time added. The more you think about this benefit, if it is one, the less significant it seems and certainly doesn't outweigh the silliness of, for instance, two moves of two and eighteen seconds taking more time than the same two moves taking ten seconds each, and potentially a player losing on time having used less time than their opponent.

Maybe if someone has a digital clock with a menu they could run it on "Bronstein" mode and see what happens.

Garrett
20-12-2007, 09:33 AM
Okay - thanks for the explanation guys.

My humble opinion is that the benefit to be gained (as far as rounds starting on time) from switching from the Fischer system which is well known in QLD to this new system would be fairly small.

However, I'm all for experimentation (sit down Howie, not that sort of experimentation) so let's see how it goes.

Cheers
George.

CameronD
20-12-2007, 09:51 AM
I'm sure at the bronstein tournament at the gap that the clock started ticking down straight away and that your refunded the increment. You can not acumulate more time than what you had when the clock started ticking.

Brian_Jones
20-12-2007, 12:38 PM
Have raised this matter with Brian Jones. Please no more discussion on this matter until there is an official decision.

I think that a decision has been given.

Aaron Guthrie
20-12-2007, 12:42 PM
I'm sure at the bronstein tournament at the gap that the clock started ticking down straight away and that your refunded the increment. You can not acumulate more time than what you had when the clock started ticking.This is how I remember that clock setting too. For example if you have 60 seconds, 5 second increment, it starts ticking down, 59,58... but if you move within 5 seconds it just goes back up to 60 seconds again.

Ian Murray
20-12-2007, 01:10 PM
I think that a decision has been given.
Which is?

Aaron Guthrie
20-12-2007, 01:17 PM
Which is?Caught behind.

Bill Gletsos
20-12-2007, 02:36 PM
Which is?It isnt eligible for the GP.

Brian_Jones
20-12-2007, 04:09 PM
It isnt eligible for the GP.

What Bill says! :)

CameronD
20-12-2007, 10:35 PM
the tournament has been removed from the grandprix website.

I hope they didn't get a refund :D

Desmond
20-12-2007, 11:11 PM
I don't have any problem with the time control. Looks like a potentially good event to me.

Ian Murray
21-12-2007, 02:25 AM
the tournament has been removed from the grandprix website.
Depends which calendar you're looking at:
http://www.chessaustralia.com.au/grandprix/index.cfm?p=calendar&year=2008 or http://www.chessaustralia.com.au/grandprix/index.cfm?p=calendar

I guess the latter is current

Garvinator
21-12-2007, 05:19 AM
I'm sure at the bronstein tournament at the gap that the clock started ticking down straight away and that your refunded the increment. You can not acumulate more time than what you had when the clock started ticking.
Indeed, now that I have tested the time control on both the red dgt's and a dgt xl you are correct.

Garrett
21-12-2007, 06:55 AM
Indeed, now that I have tested the time control on both the red dgt's and a dgt xl you are correct.

Cool - so that means you could hit 0:00 on mulitple occasions.

CameronD
21-12-2007, 09:38 AM
Cool - so that means you could hit 0:00 on mulitple occasions.

No

Once the clock hits 0.00, its flagfall since its impossible to have less than the increment at the start of a move.

Garvinator
21-12-2007, 12:33 PM
No

Once the clock hits 0.00, its flagfall since its impossible to have less than the increment at the start of a move.
I think Garrett was just being a smart ass ;)

Garrett
21-12-2007, 03:49 PM
Isn't that Fischer time control then ?

Garrett
21-12-2007, 03:50 PM
I think Garrett was just being a smart ass ;)

Usually you would be right Garvo, however in this case, I honestly have no idea. I'll just have to wait and see.

Cheers
George.

CameronD
21-12-2007, 07:41 PM
Isn't that Fischer time control then ?

The difference is that with fischer you can accumulate more time than when you started. Example with 10s increment...

time at start of move - 4.26
time spent - 5 sec.

bronstein time left - 4.26
fischer time left - 4.31

Garrett
22-12-2007, 07:34 AM
ok thanks Cameron

I've just had that little whack on the side of my head.

I understand now.

Cheers
George.

Desmond
04-01-2008, 09:52 PM
Many entries so far?

Desmond
13-01-2008, 08:31 PM
How are the entries going for this event?

Garvinator
13-01-2008, 08:48 PM
How are the entries going for this event?
Hello Brian,

Apologies for missing previous question.

I believe the entries are at about 10 at this stage. Two weeks to go.

Capablanca-Fan
13-01-2008, 09:38 PM
In all probability I will be playing a lot of chess next year Garvo.
Logan is always open (apart from two weeks over Christmas and one week on Good Friday). We've had over 20 both nights this year.

Garrett
14-01-2008, 06:37 AM
Logan is always open (apart from two weeks over Christmas and one week on Good Friday). We've had over 20 both nights this year.

Thanks Jono,

Unfortunately, I will be losing my license the day after Australia Day for several months (Garrett's been a bad boy) so won't be back playing night club chess anytime soon.

Will definitely be available, willing, and keen to play inter club though, if it is still on at the State Library on Sundays which is easily accessible by public transport.

Cheers
George.

Garrett
14-01-2008, 06:38 AM
Hello Brian,

Apologies for missing previous question.

I believe the entries are at about 10 at this stage. Two weeks to go.

I'm in Garvo. I'll pay on the day. Quite looking forward to this one.

Garrett
23-01-2008, 05:57 AM
Hi everyone

Anyone know how many we have now ?

Hopefully this tourney will be a success !!

You in Boris ? ,Howie ?

Anyone know if Tony Weller and Stokesy are playing ?

Cheers
George.

Basil
23-01-2008, 11:43 AM
Howie ?
Poss. Doubt, but poss.

Desmond
23-01-2008, 07:00 PM
I believe Weller and Stokes will play, and possibly Cashman also.

Garvinator
23-01-2008, 07:11 PM
I believe Weller and Stokes will play, and possibly Cashman also.
And what about B Thomas?

Gail will email me in the next day or so with the entrants so far. I believe there are about 15 entries, not sure who though.

Garrett
24-01-2008, 06:53 AM
15 entries would be disappointing.

Hopefully there will be at least 30-40.

Look forward to Garvo posting an update.

Cheers
George.

Garvinator
24-01-2008, 01:28 PM
15 entries would be disappointing.

Hopefully there will be at least 30-40.

Look forward to Garvo posting an update.

Cheers
George.
Of course there will be more than 15 :) that is just the number I am roughly aware of. Still waiting for Gail to reply to email for entry update.

Garvinator
25-01-2008, 04:24 PM
As sent to me by Gail.
I have had a couple of other players contact me saying they are paying tomorrow and of course there will be a few who just show up unannounced.


No Name Rtg Loc

1. THOMAS, Brian 1896
2. LOVEJOY, David 1842
3. WELLER, Tony 1762
4. LESTER, George E 1697
5. HUNTER, Shayne 1587
6. MACLEOD, Keith 1532
7. BOOY, Peter 1323
8. BARNARD, Ross 1124
9. RICHARDS, Wilfred 1067
10. GENN, Conrad 1065
11. LLOYD, Martyn 1019
12. SOO-BURROWES, Eliot W 1013
13. MENHAM, Allan 918
14. ROGERS, Jim 864
15. BARGO, Peter-John 683
16. GREBE, Ricky

Garvinator
26-01-2008, 06:42 PM
Only a small field of 20 players, so two groups of 10.


Division 1:

No Name Loc

1. LOVEJOY, David 1842
2. WELLER, Tony 1762
3. LESTER, George E 1697
4. HUNTER, Shayne 1587
5. STEWART, Craig A 1535
6. MACLEOD, Keith 1532
7. BUCIU, Aurel-John 1502
8. BOOY, Peter 1323
9. CIGELJ, David 1230
10. TORISE, Daniel 1181


Division 2:

No Name Loc

1. BARNARD, Ross 1124
2. RICHARDS, Wilfred 1067
3. GENN, Conrad 1065
4. LLOYD, Martyn 1019
5. SOO-BURROWES, Eliot W 1013
6. MENHAM, Allan 918
7. ROGERS, Jim 864
8. ADCOCK, Sean 854
9. ADCOCK, Stuart 581
10. GREBE, Ricky

Garvinator
26-01-2008, 06:45 PM
No Name Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 LOVEJOY, David 1842 3 * W W W
2 WELLER, Tony 1762 2 L * W W
3 LESTER, George E 1697 2 L * W W
4 STEWART, Craig A 1535 2 * W D D
5 BUCIU, Aurel-John 1502 2 L * W W
6 HUNTER, Shayne 1587 1.5 L * W D
7 MACLEOD, Keith 1532 1 D L * D
8 BOOY, Peter 1323 .5 L D L *
9 CIGELJ, David 1230 .5 L L D *
10 TORISE, Daniel 1181 .5 L L D *

Garvinator
26-01-2008, 06:46 PM
No Name Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 GENN, Conrad 1065 3 * W W W
2 SOO-BURROWES, Eliot W 1013 3 * W W W
3 MENHAM, Allan 918 3 * W W W
4 LLOYD, Martyn 1019 1.5 L * W D
5 RICHARDS, Wilfred 1067 1 L * W -
6 ROGERS, Jim 864 1 L L * W
7 ADCOCK, Sean 854 1 L L * W
8 ADCOCK, Stuart 581 1 L + L *
9 GREBE, Ricky .5 L L D *
10 BARNARD, Ross 1124 0 L L L *

CameronD
26-01-2008, 06:50 PM
Bad luck garvin... the tournament had a lot of good points going for it.

Garvinator
26-01-2008, 07:03 PM
Bad luck garvin... the tournament had a lot of good points going for it.
Small numbers and a disappointing result. Never mind, tournament format will be seen again later in the year most likely at some stage with a few changes. Not sure what they will be so far. Major factor though is that it will need to be promoted more.

A couple of players post on here, so maybe they will give thoughts after tournament is over.

Garvinator
27-01-2008, 06:18 PM
No Name Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 LOVEJOY, David 1842 5.5 * W W D W W W
2 BUCIU, Aurel-John 1502 5 * L W W W W W
3 WELLER, Tony 1762 4.5 L * D W W W W
4 LESTER, George E 1697 4.5 L D * W W W W
5 STEWART, Craig A 1535 3.5 D W L * D D W
6 MACLEOD, Keith 1532 2 L L D * D D D
7 BOOY, Peter 1323 2 L L D D * L W
8 HUNTER, Shayne 1587 1.5 L L L L W * D
9 CIGELJ, David 1230 1 L L L L D D *
10 TORISE, Daniel 1181 .5 L L L L D L *

Garvinator
27-01-2008, 06:22 PM
No Name Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 GENN, Conrad 1065 5 * W L W W W W
2 SOO-BURROWES, Eliot W 1013 4 * L D W D W W
3 RICHARDS, Wilfred 1067 4 L W * W W W -
4 ROGERS, Jim 864 3.5 W D L * L W W
5 LLOYD, Martyn 1019 3.5 L L * W D W W
6 MENHAM, Allan 918 3 L W L * W W L
7 BARNARD, Ross 1124 2 L D L L * D W
8 GREBE, Ricky 2 L L D L D * W
9 ADCOCK, Sean 854 2 L L L W L * W
10 ADCOCK, Stuart 581 1 L + L L L L *

Desmond
27-01-2008, 10:42 PM
Thanks Garvin for the quick updates. :)

I'm a bit suprised Hunter is not doing better.

Capablanca-Fan
27-01-2008, 11:17 PM
Thanks Garvin for the quick updates. :)

I'm a bit suprised Hunter is not doing better.
Can't see Lovejoy not winning this tourney convincingly.

Desmond
27-01-2008, 11:19 PM
I agree, he will most likely win his last 3.

Capablanca-Fan
27-01-2008, 11:44 PM
I agree, he will most likely win his last 3.
While Buciu has the three top seeds to face.

Garrett
28-01-2008, 08:20 AM
Small numbers and a disappointing result. Never mind, tournament format will be seen again later in the year most likely at some stage with a few changes. Not sure what they will be so far. Major factor though is that it will need to be promoted more.

A couple of players post on here, so maybe they will give thoughts after tournament is over.

Yes, small numbers Garvo. Still the tournament is enjoyable. Many thanks to the organisers. Like you said on Saturday, some juniors who might have played have only just returned from the Australian juniors.

Maybe some people have commitments on the long weekend. Perhaps some of the big guns are staying away die to the low prize money, and it may be that the guns draw the others in as well.

You could also ask for feedback from the people on this list who are not playing, is there any mods which they could suggest to make the tourney more attractive.

Only one change I can suggest, go back to Fischer time control. I haven't heard anyone say anything nice about the time delay method. Most people seem to be saying 'if it aint broke don't fix it' and are used to the Fischer method.

Yes Jono - David Lovejoy should win this one, he has to lose it from here.

cheers
George.

Garvinator
28-01-2008, 06:05 PM
No Name Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 LOVEJOY, David 1842 8 * W W D W W W D W W
2 LESTER, George E 1697 7.5 L * D W W W W W W W
3 WELLER, Tony 1762 7 L D * W W W D W W W
4 STEWART, Craig A 1535 5 D L L * W D D D W W
5 BUCIU, Aurel-John 1502 5 L L L L * W W W W W
6 HUNTER, Shayne 1587 3.5 L L L D L * D W D W
7 MACLEOD, Keith 1532 3 L L D D L D * D D D
8 BOOY, Peter 1323 3 D L L D L L D * D W
9 CIGELJ, David 1230 2 L L L L L D D D * D
10 TORISE, Daniel 1181 1 L L L L L L D L D *

Garvinator
28-01-2008, 06:05 PM
No Name Loc Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 GENN, Conrad 1065 7 * L W L W W W W W W
2 SOO-BURROWES, Eliot W 1013 7 W * L D W W D W W W
3 RICHARDS, Wilfred 1067 6 L W * W W D D W W -
4 ROGERS, Jim 864 5 W D L * L L W W D W
5 LLOYD, Martyn 1019 4.5 L L L W * W L D W W
6 MENHAM, Allan 918 4.5 L L D W L * W W L W
7 BARNARD, Ross 1124 4 L D D L W L * D D W
8 GREBE, Ricky 3 L L L L D L D * W W
9 ADCOCK, Sean 854 3 L L L D L W D L * W
10 ADCOCK, Stuart 581 1 L L + L L L L L L *

Adam
28-01-2008, 07:53 PM
Small numbers and a disappointing result. Never mind, tournament format will be seen again later in the year most likely at some stage with a few changes. Not sure what they will be so far. Major factor though is that it will need to be promoted more.

A couple of players post on here, so maybe they will give thoughts after tournament is over.

Looks like you need a good PR person in Qld.

Basil
28-01-2008, 08:28 PM
Looks like you need a good PR person in Qld.
What do you base that assessment on, Adam?

Garrett
24-02-2008, 06:52 PM
Adam

Are you going to respond to this query ?

Cheers
Garrett